首页> 外文期刊>Journal of general internal medicine >Unpacking resident-led code status discussions: Results from a mixed methods study
【24h】

Unpacking resident-led code status discussions: Results from a mixed methods study

机译:展开居民主导的代码状态讨论:混合方法研究的结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

BACKGROUND: The quality of code status discussions (CSDs) is suboptimal as physicians often fail to discuss patients' goals of care and resuscitation outcomes. We previously demonstrated that internal medicine residents randomized to a communication skills intervention scored higher than controls on a CSD checklist using a standardized patient. However, the impact of this training on CSD content is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Compare CSD content between intervention and control residents. DESIGN: We conducted qualitative analysis of simulated CSDs. Augmenting a priori codes with constant comparative analysis, we identified key themes associated with resident determination of code status. We dichotomized each theme as present or absent. We used chi-square tests to evaluate the association between training and presence of each theme. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-six residents rotating on the internal medicine service in July 2010 were randomized to intervention (n=25) or control (n=31). INTERVENTION: Intervention residents completed CSD skills training (lectures, deliberate practice, and self-study). Six months later, all 56 residents completed a simulated CSD. MAIN MEASURE: Comparison of key themes identified in CSDs among intervention and controls. KEY RESULTS: Fifty-one transcripts were recorded and reviewed. Themes identified included: exploration of patient values/goals, framing code status as a patient decision, discussion of resuscitation outcomes and quality of life, and making a recommendation regarding code status. Intervention residents were more likely than controls to explore patient values/goals (p=0.002) and make a recommendation (p<0.001); and less likely to frame the decision as one solely to be made by the patient (p=0.01). Less than one-third of residents discussed resuscitation outcomes or quality of life. CONCLUSION: Training positively influenced CSD content in key domains, including exploration of patient values/goals, making a recommendation regarding code status, and not framing code status as solely a patient decision. However, despite the intervention, residents infrequently discussed resuscitation outcomes and quality of life.
机译:背景:代码状态讨论(CSD)的质量欠佳,因为医生经常无法讨论患者的护理目标和复苏结果。我们先前证明,使用标准化患者,随机分组接受沟通技能干预的内科住院医师得分比CSD检查表上的对照组高。但是,此培训对CSD内容的影响尚不清楚。目的:比较干预和控制居民之间的CSD含量。设计:我们对模拟的CSD进行了定性分析。通过不断进行比较分析来增强先验代码,我们确定了与居民确定代码状态相关的关键主题。我们将每个主题分为当前主题或不存在主题。我们使用卡方检验来评估训练与每个主题存在之间的关联。参与者:2010年7月,有56位轮换内科服务的居民被随机分为干预组(n = 25)或对照组(n = 31)。干预:干预居民完成了CSD技能培训(讲座,有意识的练习和自学)。六个月后,所有56位居民都完成了模拟CSD。主要措施:比较在CSD中确定的干预和控制措施中的关键主题。关键结果:记录和审查了五十一个成绩单。确定的主题包括:探索患者价值/目标,将代码状态定为患者决策,讨论复苏结果和生活质量以及就代码状态提出建议。干预居民比对照组更有可能探索患者价值/目标(p = 0.002)并提出建议(p <0.001)。并且不太可能将这一决定视为由患者独自做出的决定(p = 0.01)。不到三分之一的居民讨论了复苏结果或生活质量。结论:在关键领域培训受积极影响的CSD内容,包括探索患者价值/目标,提出有关代码状态的建议,而不是将代码状态仅作为患者决策的框架。然而,尽管有干预措施,居民却很少讨论复苏的结果和生活质量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号